ScalingStacks

Zhang’s inequality [01K4]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

Zhang’s inequality

The essential minimum of the height hL¯h_{\overline{L}} is defined as

e⁡(L¯)=sup∅≠U⊂XinfP∈U⁡(F¯)hL¯​(P),e(\overline{L})=\sup_{\begin{subarray}{c}\emptyset\neq U\subset X\end{subarray}}\inf_{P\in U(\overline{F})}h_{\overline{L}}(P),

where the supremum runs over non-empty open subsets of XX. If LL is big, then e⁡(L¯)e(\overline{L}) is a real number. Another way to state its definition is the following : for any real number BB, then the set

{P∈X⁡(F¯);hL¯​(P)≤B}\{P\in X(\overline{F})\,;\,h_{\overline{L}}(P)\leq B\}

is Zariski dense if B>e⁡(L¯)B>e(\overline{L}), and is not Zariski dense if B<e⁡(L¯)B<e(\overline{L}).

Assume that L¯\overline{L} is an ample line bundle on XX, equipped with a semi-positive adelic metric. The (geometric/arithmetic) Hilbert-Samuel theorem implies the following inequality

e⁡(L¯)≥(c^1​(L¯)n+1|X)(n+1)​(c1​(L)n|X).e(\overline{L})\geq\frac{({\widehat{c}}_{1}(\overline{L})^{n+1}|X)}{(n+1)(c_{1}(L)^{n}|X)}.

(See Zhang [59], as well as [38, 28] for more details in the geometric case). When XX is a curve and FF is a number field, Autissier [3] proved that the inequality holds for any ample line bundle with an admissible adelic metric (see [18]) ; this extends to the geometric case.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.